Time may be Equal to Dark Energy.

[arcane_raven]

Is it possible that dark energy is time? After all in different parts of the universe every thing is moving apart at different rates (all increasing) . Time like dark energy is a mystery. One common thing we know about time/dark energy is its moving in one direction, forward (for now). In different parts of our universe maybe time is different, hence things (galaxies and other things) are moving apart at different rates. In some theorys the big rip at the end of every tunnel will indefinatly rip every thing apart down to subatomic levels and then boom over and over. Another theory is the lonely theory where everything moves away from each other until there is nothing. <br />No neighboring galaxies, then every star will burn out the end. That ones a little depressing. Well lets say dark energy just reaches its max stops for a nanosecond and then turns around and reverses. Will time as we know it reverse? Ex. I woke up, took a shower, ate breakfast, and then put my breakfast back in the bowl from my mouth, then untake my shower, then go back to bed. In perfect rewind, or will things start falling/ripping apart? We don't know, we really do not truely understand the fundamentals of time and space. I think it maybe safe to say, even if time is not dark energy they go hand in hand. <br /><br /><br /> by: Dustin Smith<br />

 

[weeman]

<font color="yellow"> One common thing we know about time/dark energy is its moving in one direction, forward (for now). </font><br /><br />Like you said, they are both moving forward as for now. However, if the Universe were to ever halt its expansion, and collapse, this might mean that dark energy is false. Or it could also mean that the dark matter in the Universe eventually overpowered the dark energy. However, even if the Universe is collapsing, it seems that time would still have to be moving forward. This might mean that dark energy and time are two completely different things. If time reversed as the Universe collapsed, then everything that happened within the life of the Universe would play back in rewind. This is the same way that you were explaining it about putting the cereal back into your bowl and untaking your shower. <br /><br /><font color="yellow"> Another theory is the lonely theory where everything moves away from each other until there is nothing. </font><br /><br />This sounds to me like the fate of an Open Universe. If the Universe is doomed to expand forever, then it will some day run out of any available fuels, making it incredibly cold. Even though stars recycle most of their matter back into the Universe, eventually everything will be broken down into nothing. Even if blackholes are the last existing things in the Universe, they might evaporate themselves into nothing. Eventually, all that would be left in the Universe would be on an atomic level. But do subatomic particles last forever? Would they eventually decay into nothing? Don't be depressed <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> for this entire process to take place, and the Universe to decay into utter nothingness, might be hundreds of billions to trillions of years from now! Of course, if there is no more Universe, does this mean the end of time? If Einstein is correct, and space and time are woven together in a 4th dimension, how can one exist without the other? The <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><strong><font color="#ff0000">Techies: We do it in the dark. </font></strong></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>"Put your hand on a stove for a minute and it seems like an hour. Sit with that special girl for an hour and it seems like a minute. That's relativity.</strong><strong>" -Albert Einstein </strong></font></p> </div>

 

[emperor_of_localgroup]

I don't know your line of thinking, but I hope someday a brilliant physicist demonstrate a mathematical relationship between time and energy, not the one we have now in mechanics.<br /><br />It is very obvious more energy leads to shorter time and less energy leads to slower time. For an electron time may virtually stands still, photons are an extreme example. Who knows even the total energy in this solar system may influence our perception of time.<br /><br />I know it sounds too philosophical until someone puts a mathematical face on it.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Earth is Boring</strong></font> </div>

 

[witgenestone]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p> This might mean that dark energy and time are two completely different things. If time reversed as the Universe collapsed, then everything that happened within the life of the Universe would play back in rewind.. <p><hr /></p></p></blockquote> <br /><br />If this were to happen. Would we be alive? Or would we even experience time as going backwards?

 

[docm]

Are you now, or are we a simulation in a holographic universe? If so who programmed it? How about residency inside a 5 dimensional black hole, which closely approximates our universe? <br /><br />Welcome to The Matrix <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[witgenestone]

You know. If the flow of time was suddently experienced backwards, or maybe in a fast rewind. And we would be alive. It would in a sense be tragic, we would know that we were unable to do anything, and even unable to laugh. So if one wants to laugh at the absurdity of time going backwards, one has to do it know! I have already done it, but I encourage everybody to get it out of the system. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> But as our life again approaches the limit to where we know what determination is, we will again reach nirvana, creep inside our mothers and die. I also wonder how the first human being would experience it.

 

[mooware]

I think if time were running backward we wouldn't be aware of it. It would seem normal to us

 

[SpeedFreek]

I agree with mooware.<br /><br />If the universe started contracting again, due to the laws of physics, then those laws would still be the same. Our <i> reference </i> point, time, wouldn't run in reverse just because the mass of the universe causes the expansion to slow down, stop, and reverse.<br /><br />All that would change is that we would be in a contracting universe, rather than an expanding universe. We would still age, radioactive isotopes would still have half-lives, planets would still revolve in the same direction. The laws of physics would continue to work in the same way as before. Are people suggesting that time would work backwards, dead people would come alive and then get younger until they were babies? Apples on the ground would spring back up into trees again? Uranium would suck radiation into itself? Stars would suck photons into themselves? Preposterous!<br /><br />I doubt we would even notice! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000">_______________________________________________<br /></font><font size="2"><em>SpeedFreek</em></font> </p> </div>

 

[witgenestone]

I'm not suggesting it. I thought I was in free space and it was meant as a joke. Just in case, I have already laughed at it. It has been boring in that regard since we found out that time isn't constant! But time is moving in a direction, I still wonder how we would perceive it if it reverses. So my question still stands.

 

[nova_explored]

time as what reference point though. Time is subjective for us. Time in reference to an isotope, or an atomic clock, is directly related to QM for that system. As speedfreek said, these systems wouldn't change.<br /><br />not to mention- the universe itself has no internal clock, and hence no way to keep record of events. Photons are the only way we can gauge the history of the universe and yet they hold no history, no indication of age, since they are in fact infinite as far as QM is concerned.<br /><br />so speedfreek is exactly right. preposterous. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[yevaud]

To be able to accurately gauge Entropy, we would have to know the exact matter/energy makeup of the universe in toto, so we could then measure changes to it.<br /><br />A bit difficult, I think. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[witgenestone]

Yeah. I've deleted the post after some reading. It was preposterous!

 

[rydan]

Maybe this can help you.<br /><br /> |<br /> | <br /> | <br /> Frequency /> | < Evolution<br /> | <br /> | <br /> |---------<br /> Time<br /><br />Note: that rubble above is sposed to be a right sided triangle lol.<br /><br />The higher the frequency (or vibration) of matter, the quicker time passes. Evolution plays its role here too, because it states that, as your frequency or vibration raises, you experience time passing quicker as well. You also evolve from it too. How do you raise your vibration? Love. the denser matter becomes the more time delay associated with it, the less dense matter becomes the less time delay associated with it. It's kind of like a universal lag. It's not all bad though, because it allows us to experience our lives as sequential events. it takes time to have a conversation, for a flower to grow. An example would be 3D matter vibrational speed = 9/10 speed of light. 4D matter vibrational speed = 10/10 speed of light. for a day to day example - 8 hours of 3D time passing would be about equivalent of 13 hours 4D time passing. also time spatial considerations to be considered as well, Because more matter can exist in the same space in 4D as 3D, you get more value for your room. A 20 cubic foot box in 3D fits in 20 cubic feet of 3D space, but a 32 cubic foot box could fit into the same space. The golden ratio 1.618 plays an important part of time space geometry. Just remeber though, dont take figures literally because 3D space only deals with Length, Width, and Height, which once known can be easily calculated as definates in systems. 4D space deals with Length, Width, Height, and Time. Time being the wildcard. The vibrational freque

 

[sponge]

Hi Rydan<br /><br />Welcome to Uplink.<br /><br /> You stated:<font color="yellow"> The golden ratio 1.618 plays an important part of time space geometry.<br /><br /><font color="white">Please explain what the Golden Ratio<font color="black">1.618<font color="white"> is please.<img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />and how it plays an important part in space geometry.<img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /></font></font></font></font> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em><u>SPONGE</u></em></p> </div>

 

[vandivx]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>No one even knows what dark energy or dark matter are. The most realistic and parsimonious hypothesis is that dark matter is composed of 'cold neutrinos", the most abundant particles in the known universe, & the energy that these massive amounts of matter carry, is 'dark energy'.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>Parsimonious is the adjective form of parsimony, from Latin parsimonia, "thrift, parsimony," from parsus, past participle of parcere, "to spare, to be sparing, to economize."<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />isn't that like invoking Occam's razor? - <blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>one should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote> (unfortunately one can't quote on this poor board without making it seem like quoting somebody on here)<br /><br />IMO true parsimony in this case would be not to invoke any particles at all since it is always possible that Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) might be the solution, improbable as it may seem to be<br /><br />personally any particle based solution strikes me as Frankensteinian, that is as forced, unharmonious, artificially glued together solution, a solution which (if it turned up to be true) would bring no truly new groundbreaking physical ideas with it and would be anticlimactic, that is dissapointing to science community (despite the initial huplah that would ensue upon the finding of such solution)<br /><br />not saying it would be quite worthless but not anything like what MOND solution might bring, like rewamped cosmology from the very ground<br /><br />that is my conviction on the matter after many sessions of 'sitting back in my chair' and pondering it on and off and invoking as much common sense as I am capable of, that MOND solution would be the only worthy solution of the problem of both dark matter and energy<br></br> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[robina_williams]

And please can someone explain to me, in the simplest terms, the significance of the golden ratio to the structure of the conch shell?

 

[yevaud]

Yes. "42." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[yevaud]

Ok, sorry. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> It's a ratio that is seen replicated in nature time and again, which Humans have themselves used for building and constructing. As simple as that, really. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[sponge]

Thanks for that bit of info. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em><u>SPONGE</u></em></p> </div>

 

[robina_williams]

Yes, but what's the significance of the replication in a spiral structure such as a conch shell? What does the ratio achieve?

 

[alkalin]

Current notions in cosmology of the big bang utilize the notion of a matrix of dimension which includes time to support the notion of expansion, which does not fully work, so it uses another math notion of inflation, just as silly as expansion to get ride of certain conflicts with expansion, yet it still does not completely resolve certain issues. The major problem with big bang theory is that it has virtually completely failed to make an accurate prediction of anything, especially of the early universe. My view is institutionalists have yet to find correct basic definitions of space and time and stick with those for further application. Sadly they have distorted the notions of space and time to try to solve a problem that does not exist-the expansion of the universe as they would interpret it based on the red shift seen in the distant universe.<br /><br />We can play with the notions of time as a variable if we like, but time is not a variable, since it is the process of motion of matter. Newton thought that time was like a clock of the universe and could be treated as a separate entity of reality, so in my view today this notion is very much yet entangled in the math notions of cosmology.<br /><br />I think the following analogy should give some kind of hint about time: If we invented a time machine to travel back in time it would need the following ability, to completely reverse the motion of all things in the universe starting from the smallest matter to the largest. The question is would we be back in the past if we could do so? Absolutely not unless we could erase our own knowledge of today.<br /><br />The past or future does not exist except in our mind, so we can only go there in implicit reality.<br />

 

[yevaud]

Efficiency. E.g., it's a form that works, as achieved by millions of years of trial and error on the part of nature. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[alokmohan]

http://sciam.com/article.cfm?chanId=sa003&articleId=1356B82B-E7F2-99DF-30CA562C33C4F03C Scientific american on dark enrgy.

 

[acsindg]

Dark energy is almost certainly electrical. See alternative magnoflux universe for more details.<br />Clive